Talk:Mount Ararat

Confusing adjective?

The article states that the mount is outside "modern Armenia". I think it would be better to say "current" because "modern" could be taken to mean the modern period (1492-1789). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.71.160.34 (talk) 12:29, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Citation Needed and it reversion

To Yerevantsi, I don't hold grudge against your or your ethnicity's background. But judge from your name that implied you are an Armenian, I don't see any urgency of you to always reverted or undo that I put on the introduction of Ararat's page. If we wanted to improve this article, we need to put the citation for what can be considered as "claim". By giving I by no mean willingly move and motivate to vandalise or undermine Armenian topics in en.wiki. Perhaps, instead of keeping reverse it, you can put the source that backs the claim up. Thank you, շնորհակալություն, shnorhakalutyun. Mfikriansori (talk)

Glaciation name

Using the North American name (Wisconsinan) for the last glaciation seems a bit odd for a mountain in West Asia. There might be one for Asia, but if not I'd use the Alpine W\"urm which is at least geographically closer. Or just say Last Glaciation. 2A01:CB08:4E:8A00:74AA:1A08:58DC:A2C3 (talk) 11:51, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Shouldn't "Origin of the tradition" be "Origin of the folklore"?

Or something similar, maybe "Origin of the mythology"? Banderson1962 (talk) 06:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Mentioning of Kurdistan

Yerevantsi, you have reverted my edit, claiming all three of my sources are unreliable and saying that I am using nationalistic terms. "these aren't reliable sources, "nothern Kurdistan" is a nationalist term implying the existence of a "Greater" Kurdistan"-Yerevantsi. Karkafs Desiderium (talk) 03:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

The article on Kurdistan says; "or Greater Kurdistan [...]" so yes Greater Kurdistan does exist, but no its not Nationalistic. It simply is another term for Kurdistan as a whole. Karkafs Desiderium (talk) 03:07, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

I confess to not having any detailed knowledge of the geographical issues here, but looking at the page Northern Kurdistan, I see it is defined as "the southeastern part of Turkey". Given that northern Kurdistan is part of Turkey, it seems redundant to refer to something as being in "eastern Turkey and northern Kurdistan". It would be like saying that something is in "the western United States and California". Why is it not sufficient to say that it is in eastern Turkey? What additional information is conveyed by saying that it is also in northern Kurdistan? CodeTalker (talk) 03:18, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Good question, I am sorry if it was not clear previously. Mentioning "Northern Kurdistan" in addition to "eastern Turkey" is not redundant because it specifically acknowledges the Kurdish identity and cultural significance of the region. This is important for recognizing the historical and political context of the Kurdish people in that area. Look at Human rights of Kurdish people in Turkey, Anti-Kurdish sentiment and Xenophobia and discrimination in Turkey (specifically Against Kurds). Karkafs Desiderium (talk) 03:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Also while Nothern Kurdistan is in Turkey the rest of Kurdistan is not, so there is also that wich goes missing when not mentioning it. Karkafs Desiderium (talk) 03:36, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Overall my point is that you would be erasing Kurdish presence in the Ararat region, i know that Kurds are partially mentiond in other parts of ther article but this does not convey the same meaning as saying "This is in Kurdistan". Karkafs Desiderium (talk) 03:41, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Do reliable sources (see WP:RS) explicitly refer to Ararat as being in "Kurdistan" (whatever that means in this context)? How relevant is it? ----Երևանցի ^talk 17:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

My three sources did refer to Ararat as being in Kurdistan (you still have not explained to me how they are unreliable), and I do have another source for Ararats Kurdish name, wich has now been removed with all mention of Kurdistan from the top section.

Why did you put Kurdistan in ditto marks? What are you trying to imply here?

"whatever that means in this context" The question I asked with this Talk-Topic is if we should mention Ararat being situated in Kurdistan, what do you not understand here?

"How relevant is it?" I explained its relevance in three comments above yours.

Yerevantsi, you still have not explained how using the term "Nothern Kurdistan" is a nationalistic term like you said it was here; ""nothern Kurdistan" is a nationalist term implying the existence of a "Greater" Kurdistan". Please explain. Karkafs Desiderium (talk) 18:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

None of your three sources are reliable for the claim. The first two (hikr.org and traveltwins.dk) are nothing but travel blogs, while the third, a German magazine, does not seem to claim that Ararat is in "Kurdistan" and even if it did, how is it an authority on this issue?

I'm not implying anything. I've asked it pretty explicitly. What does Kurdistan refer to here? A administrative region? No. A geographic term? No. How do we define Kurdistan? Any Kurdish-populated area? Then we can say Turkey's Kurdish-populated/Kurdish-majority areas, but then again, how is it relevant to Ararat? ----Երևանցի ^talk 18:59, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

The article on Kurdistan defines it as such; "Kurdistan is a roughly defined geo-cultural region [...] wherein the Kurds form a prominent majority population and the Kurdish culture, languages, and national identity have historically been based."

With this defenition of Kurdistan we can argue Ararat is in Kurdistan because;

1. The population around mount Ararat has a Kurdish majority (and with those people comes Kurdish culture)
2. The Kurdish langauge(s) are being spoken there (in its case Kurmanji)
3. The Kurdish national identity has historically been based there partially because of the Ararat rebellion

Yerevantsi, you still have not explained how using the term "Nothern Kurdistan" is a nationalistic term like you said it was here; ""nothern Kurdistan" is a nationalist term implying the existence of a "Greater" Kurdistan". Please explain. Karkafs Desiderium (talk) 20:22, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

It is a nationalist term because its usage is based on an ethnic/national category. "Northern Kurdistan" implies the existence of "Southern Kurdistan". Does anyone except Kurdish nationalists refer to Iraq's Kurdish region as such? But this discussion can go on and on and is redundant here. Unless you can find reliable sources that explicitly state that Ararat is the highest peak of "northern Kurdistan", it has no place in the article, especially the lead. ----Երևանցի ^talk 20:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Since Kurdistan is as a region there must be a southern part of this region, so deviding Kurdistan according to its parts in Turkey, Iraq and so on by naming them North, South and so on is simple logic, not nationalism. Also southern Kurdistan is a correct term for Iraqi Kurdistan, you are insulting me for no reason here.. unless directions are nationalistic.

"Unless you can find reliable sources that explicitly state that Ararat is the highest peak of "northern Kurdistan", it has no place in the article, especially the lead."

1. A source does not need to specify that it is in nothern Kurdistan, because nothern Kurdistan is not a seperate entity from Kurdistan as a whole, as it name implys it simply is the nothern part of Kurdistan.
2. A source does not need to specify that it is the highest peak in Kurdistan, because there are no other peaks any higher than it anywhere near what is considered Kurdistan. It is already given that if Ararat is in Kurdistan that it is/would be its highest peak.

With this out of the way what is in your opinion a reliable source if even a magazine is not enough. Karkafs Desiderium (talk) 21:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

"even a magazine"? Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia, consulting scholarly works or authoritative sources is what's expected here. ----Երևանցի ^talk 22:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)